Christmas Lake Homeowners Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 204559189
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2021
- Location
- Deephaven, MN, USA
- Phone
- 6122097629
- Rating
- 63
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $186,332
- Expenses
- $153,313
- Assets
- $278,971
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Steve Sundberg (President)
People named in this filing
- Steve Sundberg (President)
- Paul Cossette (Secretary)
- Margrette Newhouse (Treasurer)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Purpose: To protect and improve the quality of Christmas Lake for all lake users to enjoy today and for future generations
What it reported doing in 2025
Fee paid to Waterfront Restoration for level 2 inspections for boats and watercraft entering Christmas Lake to support our activity of prevention of introduction or minimize the impact of aquatic invasive species. 2680 hours of staffed landing 202 days of inspection 2,186 watercraft inspections. #1 best water quality in 7 county metro area and thriving aquatic species and clarity. Misc expenses for internet equipment etc. Grants from Hennepin County 15000 City of Shorewood 5000
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 12
- Sustainability: 66
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 74.5%; rating input score 75
- Program expense ratio: 90.6%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 17.7%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.82; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -24.3% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 24.1% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 74.5% of revenue deployed · 90.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 128 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $139K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 35 of 41 current checks pass · 6 findings to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX AllOtherExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesAccounting column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.